He’s upset because people are bothering him for packages that are out of his control. A similar thing happened recently with OBS where a distro was packaging it in a non-standard way, iirc.
They’re not being bothered. They are a sensible asshole. Nothing wrong with that, and they are free to express their truth of how they feel. But there’s no evidence of harassment, if they think bug reports and feature requests is abuse then they are in for a rude experience if someone is stupid enough to actually harass them.
They should just take their project proprietary anyways. The license used is a joke. Duckstation is not open source, the license is so restrictive that it is barely source available. They are not ideologically, or in practice, part of the FOSS community. So they’re free to take their toy home with them. They weren’t playing nice with others anyway.
If you don’t want to see your software packaged in ways outside of your control, is it smart to publish it with a license that allows it to be packaged in ways outside of your control?
Nah man I maintain a few decently sized packages on github and refusing support etc is perfectly normal but generally you don’t go on this toxic rant and just say “nah man I can’t afford to maintain this” which is very well accepted.
agelord@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
He’s upset because people are bothering him for packages that are out of his control. A similar thing happened recently with OBS where a distro was packaging it in a non-standard way, iirc.
dustyData@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They’re not being bothered. They are a sensible asshole. Nothing wrong with that, and they are free to express their truth of how they feel. But there’s no evidence of harassment, if they think bug reports and feature requests is abuse then they are in for a rude experience if someone is stupid enough to actually harass them.
They should just take their project proprietary anyways. The license used is a joke. Duckstation is not open source, the license is so restrictive that it is barely source available. They are not ideologically, or in practice, part of the FOSS community. So they’re free to take their toy home with them. They weren’t playing nice with others anyway.
kadup@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
If you don’t want to see your software packaged in ways outside of your control, is it smart to publish it with a license that allows it to be packaged in ways outside of your control?
JackbyDev@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
~11 months ago they relicensed from GPL 3 to CC BY-NC-ND.
bss03@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
Oh. Time for a fork. -ND variants are not Free Software / Open Source.
drmoose@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Nah man I maintain a few decently sized packages on github and refusing support etc is perfectly normal but generally you don’t go on this toxic rant and just say “nah man I can’t afford to maintain this” which is very well accepted.